IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0205169.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Working memory span tasks: Group administration and omitting accuracy criterion do not change metric characteristics

Author

Listed:
  • Ratko Đokić
  • Maida Koso-Drljević
  • Nermin Đapo

Abstract

The study examined the psychometric characteristics of three automated working memory span tasks: operational, reading, and symmetry span task, administered in groups of participants. For each task, the metric characteristics of six scoring procedures were evaluated: partial, absolute, partial non-weighted, absolute non-weighted, partial weighted, and absolute weighted scoring. Metric characteristics of all measures were compared across two parallel analyses: with and without application of a typical 85% accuracy criterion on the processing component of the tasks. The study demonstrates that the group administration of span tasks does not compromise their psychometric characteristics. All the tasks had an adequate internal consistency with Cronbach’s αs equal to or above .70; the exception being all types of the symmetry span task absolute scores with α values close to .60. Furthermore, all tasks have satisfactory convergent construct validity as well as criterion validity estimated in relation to measures of fluid intelligence. Omitting the 85% accuracy criterion on the processing component of the span tasks did not impair their psychometric properties. Thus, it is recommended that researchers discard this accuracy criterion as a criterion for filtering the results for further statistical analyses.

Suggested Citation

  • Ratko Đokić & Maida Koso-Drljević & Nermin Đapo, 2018. "Working memory span tasks: Group administration and omitting accuracy criterion do not change metric characteristics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-22, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0205169
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205169
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0205169
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0205169&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0205169?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0205169. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.